Gun control

The use of Gun control is against the second amendment, whereas it states;
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. "

(As told by ucla.edu)

I will prove my case through two main ideals; Security and Safety

First, I will discuss why security is a contributing factor to a nations welfare.
If, during war time, the United states was invaded, it would be required for a civil defence, to maintain personal security and for defensive Gurriela warfare.

Second, I will discuss my second value, safety.

The use of firearms has been used in defense against another american in the past, when your life is in dangered, it may become required to use lethal force, in order to save yourself.

Thank you for starting this debate.

I have ten minutes to argue as you have set it.

Gun Control does not mean getting rid of guns.

Control means to exercise restraint or direction over.

Would you be alright with a murder being allowed to buy a gun?

The outright banning of guns would be bad in the situations you listed.

Also getting rid of Gun control would be allowing a child to buy a gun.

This would cause chaos in the world.

In the end, there would be more harm than good.

In this world we must have order; we cannot just allow anyone to get a gun.

I thank my opponent for this debate and thank the audience also.

Vote Pro

Sources:
(1). http://dictionary.reference.com...